The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Hi.

The other day I walked into an antique shop that had a few Victrolas for sale. One was a VV 4-3, the other was the Consolette. I looked on the Victor Victrola site for more information, but came away more confused. One page on that site seemed to portray them as the same machine.

I thought the Consolette had the better reproducer so that it could play the electrically recorded records. Is this reproducer still considered almost impossible to rebuild?

I will go back next week to listen to both machines. Any suggestions on what is the better machine. What are the fundamental differences between the two.

Thank you.

Kevin Aschenmeier

Hi Kevin:

It can be a little confusing.

When the Orthophonic line was first introduced in November of 1925, Victor began using fancy model names in place of the numeric designations on the manufacture ID plates. Later, the names were dropped and numbers were put on the plates, instead.

The initial Orthophonic line was comprised of four models -- the Credenza (which became the 8-30), the Granada (which became the 4-4), the Colony (4-5)and the Consolette ( which became the 4-3).

So, the short answer to your question is that the Consolette IS the 4-3. However, there were some changes to the model over the years of its production.

The very first Consolette models, for instance, were fitted with a single spring motor, a ten inch turntable, an open horn (no grille), as well as sound boxes made from all brass.

During following year, 1926, Consolettes were fitted with 12 inch turntables, double spring motors, automatic brakes, grilles, and--unfortunately--pot metal sound boxes.

A year later, the same components were used, but the cabinet was changed to a more modern style, as noted here -- http://www.victor-victrola.com/4-3.htm

Hope this made sense,

DS

It seems there are lately a lot of negative references to the pot metal orthophonic reproducers. Yes, if they're swelled,cracked or crumbling, then a restoration job can't be done without using parts from others, but in my experience if the metal has remained stable you stand a good chance of being able to restore it. Soundwise I find no advantage to the brass, and these have been a bit crazy-high priced lately IMHO!
Bob

Victor began using potmetal reproducers on all models, not just the cheaper models, beginning early in 1926. It was cheaper to use, therefore more practical for them. I suspect the only reason they used brass early on was that it took time for them to get their potmetal production faclities up to speed. Potmetal reproducers and other parts are so hated today only because of their propensity to self destruct over time. Originally they served their intended purpose very well and many of them still do.

Jim

phonojim wrote:...It was cheaper to use, therefore more practical for them. I suspect the only reason they used brass early on was that it took time for them to get their potmetal production faclities up to speed. ....

Jim

That certainly makes sense. Along this line, die-casting would have cut down the production time considerably, compared to the spinning/tooling/polishing required for each sound box's front and back plate. The faster, far less labor intensive process, also would have cut production costs substantially.

In addition to the expense required to produce the new Orthophonic line -- tooling, training, etc.-- Victor had to shell out the up-front licensing fee -- $50,000.00 -- for use of the Western Electric recording system, along with royalties for each record produced and an annual minimum royalty -- http://www.stokowski.org/Licensing_West ... lumbia.htm

DS

Kevin Aschenmeier wrote:Hi.
The other day I walked into an antique shop that had a few Victrolas for sale.

I walked into an antique store one time, and asked "What's new"... they kicked me out!

Regarding potmetal reproducers, I have had some that looked really bad but played very good. As long as there is no air leaks through the cracks.

Hi Kevin:

Looking over your original post, there's something I should have added to my above post. When you examine the Consolette and 4-3, make sure to check that both have the original components installed, and not replacements. I've seen quite a few Orthophonic models that were "fixed up" by the seller, meaning that the original (damaged) tonearms and sound boxes were replaced with those from earlier Victrola models, or even those from other manufacturers.

Both machines, in other words, should be equipped with the Orthophonic style tonearm --
(Note -- this example has been modified with a replacement support, replacing the crumbled original.)

... and Orthophonic sound box --
...and not the earlier style goose neck tone arm and sound box equipped with a mica diaphragm --
Not to add to the confusion, but there was an Export version of the Consolette that was fitted with the older style louvered horn, goose neck tone arm, and #2 sound box, but these are relatively rare. I saw one for sale on Craigslist a few years ago, but that's the only one I've seen in 30+ years.

As for performance, even if they have the correct parts, they may or may not sound identical. It all depends on the condition of the sound boxes, as noted. Of course, you'll also want to make sure that both motors are running okay, and that the tonearm brackets are in good condition.

If you're still not sure, if possible, take some photos of each and post them here.

DS

Hi.
Thank you for all of the information and tips.

All I need now is time to look closer.

Kevin

Hi.
I stoped by the antique shop to have a closer look today.

The VV 4-3 does have the correct reproducer and tone-arm, as does the Consolette.

Strangely enough they only had one crank. It fit the 4-3, but not the consolette.

The consolette had a grill cloth. This seemed strange. The grill cloth on the 4-3 looked faded and a bit stained. I interpreted this to mean that it was original.

The 4-3 sounds very nice. It was very loud and sharp. I never had the chance to hear the consolette, since it did not have a crank.

Both machines were assembled/made in Canada. Their serial numbers both have a C in them. I should have written them down. The 4-3 was VV 4-3 C ******. I would assume the C stands for Canada.

I am leaning towards the 4-3.

Kevin

Canadian Victor Orthophonic models did have some occasional differences from their US counterparts. In some cases there were even different models altogether produced north of the border (I'm thinking of the downsized one -- the 8-10 C -- based on the 8-35, which consisted only of the center section without album storage).